Fabrication and Mechanics of Fiber-Reinforced Elastomers

Final Defense Larry Peel

Department of Mechanical Engineering Advisor - Dr. David Jensen Center for Advanced Structural Composites Brigham Young University Nov. 5, 1998

Presentation Outline
Introduction Review

Previous Work Objectives of Current Work Fabrication and Processing Experimental Data Nonlinear Model and Predictions Demonstrate Simple Application (Rubber Muscle) Conclusions Questions

Introduction to Research
What are Fiber-Reinforced Elastomers (FRE)? Flexible rubber structures with embedded fibers Tires - rigid, linear properties, low elongation Why conduct research? Increase awareness Resolve processing and experimental issues Improve predictive capability Create new applications

Flexible underwater vehicles Aircraft surfaces Bio-mechanical devices Inflatable space structures

Introduction to Research - Contd

Special Considerations Material and Geometric nonlinearity of FRE composites, Processing concerns, Testing (gripping) difficulties, Little published processing information, Few published experimental results,

Calendering process (tires, belting) not suitable.

Previous Work
Processing and Experimental Philpot et al. -- Conducted filament winding with elastomers, concerned with elastomer curing. Krey, Chou, and Luo -- Arranged fibers by hand, 1-2% fibervolume processes, have potential for fiber mis-alignment. Bakis & Gabrys -- Elastomer as matrix for composite flywheels. Theoretical Lee et al. -- Conducted tire research (linear material models), Clark -- Used a bi-linear stress-strain model on tire-composites. Chou, Luo -- Specimens had wavy fibers, model used quadratic material nonlinearity, considered strains up to 20%.

Previous Work - Japan

Flexible micro-actuators, rubber fingers, snakes were found at Toshiba, Okayama Univ., and Okayama Science Univ.

Objectives of Research
Fabrication Develop low-cost (non-calendering) fabrication technique, with high fiber volume fractions, high quality specimens. Fabricate simple application. Experiment Characterize elastomer, fiber and FRE properties. Obtain high quality test results from FRE angle-ply specimens. Theory Modify laminated plate model to include material and geometric nonlinearity. Predict response of FRE rubber muscle application.

Materials Used
Fibers:

PP&G 1062 High strength, high stiffness, common aerospace fiber. Cotton Wellington twine
Fiberglass
Used in Japan, fibrils promote adhesion, inexpensive.

Matrix: Silicone Rubber Dow-Corning Silastic

Green, 2-part, low viscosity, 700% elongation, stiffens as stretched, needs primer for good adhesion with fiberglass.

Urethane Rubber

Ciba RP 6410-1

Yellow, 2-part, low viscosity, 330% elongation softens as stretched, exhibits good adhesion with fiberglass and cotton.

Fabrication Methods - Winding

Fibers wound, Elastomer applied to dry fibers, Teflon-coated peel-ply wrapped over elastomer and fiber layer, Process is repeated for 4 or 5 layers.

Fabrication Methods - Curing

Bleeder cloth, Flat caul plates, Vacuum bagged,

Autoclave Cure Parameters:

40 psi , 160 F, 45 minutes.

High quality fiber-reinforced elastomer prepreg.

Fabrication Methods - Lamination

Prepreg is laminated using silicone or urethane rubber. Vacuum-bagged again. Cured in autoclave again.

Specimens are dog-boned using a water-jet cutter.

Fiber volume fractions 12% to 62%.

Experimental -Tension Test Articles

Dry cotton Rubberimpregnated cotton Fiberglass not tested Fiber-Reinforced Elastomer Coupons
4 specimens each at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90

Elastomers 5 silicone 5 urethane

Fibers

Silicone/cotton,
Urethane/cotton,

Silicone/fiberglass,
Urethane/fiberglass.

Experimental - Cotton Behavior

Dry

cotton - impregnated
Stress (MPa)

50 45

7000 6000 5000 4000

Silicone

40 35

cotton

cotton Surprising Results Ec = 47 ksi Es/c = 82 ksi Eu/c = 107 ksi

Urethane

- impregnated

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.05 0.1 Strain (m/m)

u/c (Average) s/c (Average) Dry Cotton Linear Fit

3000 2000 1000 0 0.15

Stress (psi)

Experimental - FRE Behavior

20 18 16 14
Urethane/Fiberglass u/g 0 avg u/g 15 avg u/g 37 avg u/g 45 avg u/g 53 avg u/g 75 avg u/g 90 avg urethane rubber

12
2500

10
Stress (MPa)

2000

Stress (MPa)

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0

Stress (psi)

1000 800 600 400

1500

6 4 2

1000

500

200 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 1.25 1.5 1.75

0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 Strain (m/m)

Strain (m/m)

Vf = 17.9% Urethane - linear and softening

Vf = 59.4% Silicone - stiffening

Stress (psi)

Silicone/Cotton s/c 0 avg s/c 15 avg s/c 30 avg s/c 45 avg s/c 60 avg s/c 75 avg s/c 90 avg silicone rubber

1600 1400 1200

Experimental - FRE Behavior

16 14 12
Urethane/Cotton u/c 0 avg u/c 15 avg u/c 30 avg u/c 60 avg u/c 75 avg u/c 90 avg urethane rubber

12
2000

10 8 6 4 2

Stress (MPa)

Stress (psi)

8 6 4 2 0 0 0.2 0.4

1000

800 600 400 200

500

0 0.6 0.8 1

0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Strain (m/m)

Strain (m/m)

Vf = 62.4% Urethane - linear and softening elongation

Vf = 12.1% Silicone - stiffening,

Stress (psi)

10

Stress (MPa)

1500

Silicone/Glass s/g 0 avg s/g 15 avg s/g 30 avg s/g 60 avg s/g 75 avg s/g 90 avg silicone rubber

1600 1400 1200 1000

Experimental - Material Properties

7 6
Urethane/Fiberglass Urethane/Cotton Silicone/Fiberglass Silicone/Cotton

1000

7000 6000
Urethane/fiberglass Urethane/cotton Silicone/fiberglass Silicone/cotton

1000

Transverse Stiffness (kPa)

Shear Modulus (MPa)

5 4 3 2

Shear Modulus (psi)

800

5000 4000 3000 2000

600

600

400

400

200 1 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0

200 1000 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 Strain (m/m) 1.5 2.0 0

Strain (m/m)

G12 vs ex E2 vs ex Nonlinearity a function of elastomer matrix. Magnitude a function of Vf and fiber type.

Transverse Stiffness (psi)

800

Classical Laminated Plate Theory

Assumes small strains and material properties are constant. E1 E2, G12, n12 stiffnesses Qij. Qij rotated Qij. Rotated stiffnesses assembled for each layer, become laminate stiffnesses Aij, Bij, and Dij.

Laminate forces Ni, and moments Mi; Ni=[Aij]{ej}+[Bij]{kj}, Mi =[Aij]{ej}+[Bij]{kj}, ej - midplane strains, kj - curvatures. The modified theory considers nonlinear material properties and nonlinear strain-displacement theory.

Nonlinear Model - Material

Ogden model

s =S cj(abj-1-a-(1+0.5bj))

a (extension ratio) = e +1 e = strain a (extension ratio) = e +1

Polynomial Model

s = a1 + a2e + a3e2 + a4e3

Mooney-Rivlin Model (2-coefficient)

s = 2(a-a-2)(c1+c2a-1)

Mooney-Rivlin Model (3-coefficient)

s =2(c1a-c2/a3+c3(1/a3-a))

a (extension ratio) = e +1

Nonlinear Model - Material

Linear E1 assumed, Nonlinear Ogden model

Shear Modulus (kPa)

1500 200 1250 150

1000

Form: E2, G12 = ds / da

750 100 500

s/c 45 G12 Ogden 6

=S cj((bj-1)abj-2+(1+.5bj)a-(2+0.5bj))
6 constants: c1, c2 , c3, b1,b2, b3.

50

250

3rd order polynomial Mooney-Rivlin 2 Mooney-Rivlin 3

0 0.1 0.3 0.5 Strain (m/m) 0.7

Shear Modulus (psi)

chosen for E2, G12.

Nonlinear Model - Geometric

Geometrically nonlinear strain-displacement relations. Includes high elongation terms. Addition of nonlinear components changes method of solution to iterative or incremental. Load is incrementally applied in form of strain. Fiber re-orientation is function of geometry.

Nonlinear Model - Predictions

1600 1400 1200
Stress (psi)
s/g avg

2500

2000
s/g predicted

1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 Strain (in/in) 2 2.5

Stress (psi)

u/c avg

1500

u/c predicted

1000

500

0 0 0.25 0.5 Strain (in/in) 0.75 1

Vf=12.1%

Vf=62.4%

Predictions compare very well for most data points

Nonlinear Model - Predictions

24 20
Stress (MPa)
u/g Predicted u/g 0 avg u/g 15 avg u/g 37 avg u/g 45 avg u/g 53 avg u/g 75 avg u/g 90 avg

18

3000 2500
Stress (psi)
Stress (MPa)

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.5

2000 1500 1000 500 0

12 8 4 0 0 0.5

1500 1000 500 0

1 1.5 Strain (m/m)

1 Strain (m/m)

1.5

Vf = 17.9%

Vf = 59.4%

Trends and magnitudes predicted well (except u/g 37, 53).

Stress (psi)

16

s/c s/c s/c s/c s/c s/c s/c

Predicted 0 avg 15 avg 30 avg 45 avg 60 avg 90 avg

2500 2000

Nonlinear Model - Poissons Ratios

35

Poisson's ratio, v xy

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 15 30 45 60 Off-axis angle, q

silicone/cotton silicone/glass urethane/cotton urethane/glass

75

90

Nonlinear model will predict Poissons ratios at each angle, and as a function of strain. Poissons ratios may be nonlinear.

Rubber Muscle - Predictions

Pressure (psi)

0 3000 2500 2000

Force (N)

20

40

60
0
30

Pressure (psi)

20

40

60
30

Silicone/Cotton Silicone/Fiberglass Urethane/Cotton Urethane/Fiberglass

600
25 25 20
Fiber Angle (degrees)

500
Fiber Angle (degrees)

400 1500 300 1000 500 0 0 100 200 300 400

Pressure (kPa)

Force (lbs.)

20

15
Silicone/Cotton

15

200 100 0

10 5

Silicone/Fiberglass Urethane/Cotton Urethane/Fiberglass

10 5

0 0 100 200 300 400 Pressure (kPa)

Can be an actuator, integral part of flexible structure, high force.

Conclusions - Fabrication
Modified standard composites processes to fabricate high quality fiber-reinforced elastomer prepreg Fiber-rubber adhesion -- Autoclave pressure, primer, careful choice of fiber/elastomer combinations. High fiber volume fraction -- Filament winder allows user to adjust fraction (12% - 62%). Parallel, straight fibers -- Caul plate, filament winder, and rectangular mandrel.

Improved process facilitates fabrication of more complex FRE applications.

Conclusions - Experimental
Acquired high quality elastomer, fiber, and FRE stressstrain results and nonlinear properties. Elastomer stress-strain results show nonlinear trends. Extensional stiffnesses for rubber-impregnated cotton are 74% to 128% higher than for dry cotton. New test fixture works well (except with 0 fiberglassreinforced rubber). Nonlinearity is a function of elastomer and fiber angle. Shear and transverse properties functions of Vf , fiber type, and elastomer type. Nonlinear material properties used in nonlinear CLT model.

Conclusions - Nonlinear Model

Incorporated material and geometric nonlinearity into a modified classical laminated plate model. Fiber reorientation is incorporated into a rubber muscle model. A six-coefficient Ogden rubber model used for nonlinear material properties. Extensional terms of Lagrangian strain-displacement tensor included. Nonlinear model provides good to excellent correlation with tensile stress-strain data. Rubber muscle model predicts force, fiber angle change, displacement, provides valuable insights into muscle behavior. Research provides new and valuable tools for FRE research.

Many Thanks to:

Wife Advisor Committee Makayla, Dr. David Jensen, Pitt, Eastman, Cox, Howell

Family, office-mates, and Brigham Young University.

This effort was sponsored in part by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Air Force Material Command, USAF, under grant number F49620-95-1-0052, US-Japan Center of Utah.